Should Apple help the FBI or no?

Apple is asking to be an exception to the rule.

 

Yeah but Google/Twitter/Facebook have their back, right? I know that all these companies aren't exactly privacy-friendly; but since the masses of people are doing nothing to retain their privacy, it's kind of a good thing that the most powerful companies in the world are stepping up to the this issue. At least in this regard it is, to this day, a good thing.

I do think helping government agencies is necessary like in the case of a smartphone that belonged to a terrorist or any crime to humanity that was done via technology. But issuing an update like the one that the FBI asked would lead to all Apple phones being vulnerable not only to the US government, but to anyone who does a simple brute-force into the passwords.

 

Stop using regime change in the Middle East; stop supporting Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, the great sponsors of Sunni extremism; stop giving Israel free rein to their own Zionist fundamentalism. This is how to fight terrorism: at its source.

No, no, no to any prey on our privacy, we are not the enemy. The enemy resides in Washington, London or Berlin; it roams the corridors of the EU or the UN; it seats itself in BIS and Bilderberg meetings. The enemy are all those centers of Power that see us as the canvas to their dream of International Government.

 

Apple has broken into Iphones over 70 times, all at the request of law enforcement - they do not deny this. Apple have assisted the NSA many times with snooping in the past - we now know this because of what was revealed by Edward Snowden. When this all happened privacy was not an issue, rights were not an issue and there were no warrants obtained or court orders served.

What makes this case so different? The concern over impenetrable encryption. A backdoor is required to gather evidence if the next generation of phones deploy it. Apple intends to deploy it in their next product release. The FBI is siezing this opportunity to get their backdoor now and Apple is protecting their brand.

Both sides are being challenged by the Public to get it right. Taking one side or the other, is not helping in getting it right.

 

"Snowden: FBI's claim it can't unlock the San Bernardino iPhone is '********' "

 

Just like I said [post#24]. It's like nobodies FN awake!

 

Absolutely No. To fight against terrorism is to fight against injustice and conditions that creates the sources of it, locally.
We can never be totally safe and can only fight against all kinds of totaliatarism. The orwellian spy systems too.

 

So what I'm seeing is 99.999% of the public & 95% of Wilders believes the establishment that the *** agencies don't have access.

Come on don't drink the Kool-Aid Wilders!

 

If you mean by agency Apple company, well it is easier "relatively" to whistleblow a company than on a governments level, without loosing everything. Our responsibility is to fight for our privacy with what we can. Against paranoid stalkings in every level.

 

Not sure of your point. Would you delineate please?

I'll make myself clearer. If I was referring to apple using asterisks it'd be ***** not ***.

 

NO !! They already offered to get and divulge all information if the FBI gives them the phone but the FBI wants the ability to do it themselves. So it isn't the San Bernadino event at all, it's the expansion of the surveillance society they want.

 

Yes, but:
- only on a case by case basis.
- only if required after a proper judicial review.
- only if the mechanism for opening the phone(s) remains known only to apple.

No, if the mechanism must be released to the government to use at it's discretion.

 

They want the general public to ask for this and for companies like Apple to be held blameless for cooperating. Looks like it's working. What happened to John McAfee solving this problem for us?

 

OP what about a 3rd voting choice option of "They already are".

 

If this request was made as a reasonable exception only to target certain groups of people (in accordance to what is legally allowed), I would agree to it.

However, seeing that the request is almost like asking for a universal backdoor, and with a potential for abuse by other parties, I have hesitations in supporting it.

 

I voted no as any backdoor that is created will eventually leak to outside sources & be exploited by others. This case just seems the be the FBI trying to set a legal precedent so they can then demand access to even more phones.

 

IMO they should help FBI hardware wise but not software wise. Meaning I would be okay with Apple helping FBI physically finding a way to dismantle the phone and make copies of the flash so they can be cracked. But not sofware wise in terms of backdoor in the iOS.

 

Totally agree. Privacy it's a fundamental right, but the right to live and to save own life it's the first and most fundamental right. So, privacy can, I say MUST, be limited - at the conditions said by login123 - if it can save one life. Definitely. Who says No, makes an idol of privacy.

 

The big problem is that the NSA/CIA/FBI messed up their trust with their citizens by going outside of judiciary review in kangaroo courts. They lost our trust and it's something that is not easy to regain.

 

More people care about the Kardashian's than anything important like this. The sheep just wait in line while watching/listening/participating in pablum.

 

iSheep, good news: It was just reported that the FBI unlocked the iPhone without Apple's help.

 

I know it. I'm european: I trust a little more our security services, but certainly they too won't be completely pure and transparent. But the freedom to live is much more important than privacy.

 

I wonder if Apple wishes they had helped the FBI rather than pretending that their phones were so secure and being proven wrong. I think it makes them look a little foolish. At least it seems to me if they had helped they would have had more control over how the "back door" is used.

 

It just proves Edward Snowdon and a few other right. The whole thing was a ruse to set a legal precedent for easy access to encrypted devices for law enforcement. Just thinking about it bit, all they needed to do was to image the phones storage which is standard practice for data recovery and forensics. Once the data is off the original device, all kinds of possibilities open up to decrypt it. I wouldn't regard an encrypted phone, from Apple or anyone, as more than a delay tactic in a case like this.

 

Well the law suit is over the FBI broke into the phone. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35914195?SThisFB